I read the article in the Oct/Nov issue of “Handloader” and found enough interest in the article that I wanted to put it to the test with my .270...

My .270 is a bone stock Winchester 70, push feed Ranger model with a Redfield Revolution 3-9. Nothing fancy by any means but it has been a great shooter. I’m fairly new to loading for the .270... I’ve always been an 06 fan and what loading I have done for my .270 has been with mostly 140 grain pills.



I had some differences than the article load data. I used the written 49.5 grains of IMR-4064 but I used brand new WW brass, CCI-BR primers and all loads had a COAL of 3.250” for all bullets.

I loaded 130 Nos PT, 130 Horn SP, 130 Sierra BTSP (the bullet used in the article) and the 130 Speer BTSP.

I also shot 2, three shot groups instead of 2, five shot groups. I let the barrel cool 2 minutes between groups and 5 minutes between loads. My rifle could stand a bedding/floating job as I had a consistent shift in the zero between groups with a warm barrel but all loads performed very acceptable in my opinion. The Hornady load won the day but if I hadn’t pulled the one shot on the Sierra load, I think it would have beat the Hornady load. Also with the Nosler load, I only let the barrel cool for one minute between groups. The Speer load was the worst but still at MOAish.



In short, I’m sold. Much like the article I think I could work up a little even though the 49.5 load is above current max load data. My rifle showed ZERO pressure signs and the load actually felt very mild. I didn’t get any chrono data as I only have a strap on the barrel chrono that throws accuracy way off.

Thought you all might find my findings interesting,

Todd

I think the way you laid out the target and shot the groups shows a lot of information at a glance, concise and clear. Good rifle and good work, thank you.

The Hornady 130 spite point always shot extremely well in every.270 I owned.

You are the custom knifemaker as I recall.

The Hornady SP shoots excellent out of both of my 270's with a variety of powders. Doesnt surprise me about the 4064 cause its a powder that seems to work for everything. Good test... youve got me wanting to do one now.

That’s pretty danged cool. I wouldn’t mind giving that a shot myself. It almost looks like if you seated a skosh deeper you’d pull in some of the 2-1’s but either way it’s pretty danged good. What did the article show for speed with that load? 2950’ish or so?

May have to give that a shot in one of my 270’s just for grins. It’d make a very inexpensive practice load as well. Especially with something like the Hornady or Speers.

Not much out there that load wouldn’t work fine on. Nice shooting. Cool rifle.

To the op, if your satisfied do not chrono them, depression could set in.

That is good work.

I have had two of the Win 670, both in '06. And they both shot just like that with just about any 165, and also Hornady 190 btsp. And yes they shot even better after tweaking the trigger and bedding the action with Acra-glas in a manner to float the barrel.

And yes, when I bought a Chrony, they were over 200 fps slower than I had thought. But the groups were still tight.

A little more background on the article, 49.5 grains of IMR-4064 with a 130 grain bullet was a favorite accuracy load of Jack O’Connor’s. Terry Weiland wrote the article and put that load to the test with 5 different 270’s. He used the 130 Sierra BTSP for all loads. The results were favorable and all chrono data with all 5 rifles was around 3000 FPS, FYI...

I expect my loads will reflect close to that as well and as stated earlier, a 130 @ 3000 is no slouch. I’m going to confirm one of my loads this afternoon and I’ll report back.

Thanks for following along!

Todd

Just shot 5 130 Hornady’s with 49.5 of IMR 4064 over my Magnetospeed and averaged 2988 with an extreme spread of only 10...

A load that has accuracy, velocity and economics behind it is hard to beat!

Todd

Go hunting.

Geno

Isn’t anything to not like about that load! Very nice.

Just read Jack OConners article handloading the 270 in the eight edition of Handloaders digest. I had forgotten how thorough a reloader he was. I liked that his first order of surplus 4831 from Bruce Hodgdon was 200 Lbs. I would be willing to bet he got a slower lot too as his charges ran hot even for the surplus 4831.

I tried the same thing today with Fed brass, cci200 primers and the following... 130 Hornady SP, 130 Hornady SST, 130 Nosler Accubond, 130 Speer Hot Core, and 130 gr Federal Hi Shok... the biggest group was around 1 moa with the SST's and the smallest less than a 1/4 with the Hot Core.... Every group was great. I knew there was a reason I loved 4064. I did load all but the Fed to 3.25 OAL. Recoil even seemed non existent. Color me impressed and more than a little happy. I finally got an ACcubond to fly good in that gun!!

I guess I'm a lazy reloader, as I've been reloading for the 270 since about 1980, and I've only used one powder.......H4831. I've also only used 2 different powder charges......59.5, and 60.0. I figure that if it ain't broke, it don't need fixing, and it's always worked very well for me.

Speaking about IMR-4064, I knew a fellow who used I for practically everything he reloaded........22-250, 243, 270, 280, and 30-06. He always killed what he shot at, so I guess it worked.

Doethumper, glad I’m not the only one and I thank you for taking the time to report.

JamesJr, No doubt H4831 is probably the best all around powder for the .270, but at 10 grains less per charge, great velocity and even better inherent accuracy, there isn’t much to not like the 4064 loads in cheap 130’s..

Todd

Congrats on finding a good load that suits you.

If it were me, however, I'd try tilting the muzzle down, and then raising it to fire. Then I'd repeat with the muzzle pointed up, then lower to shoot. In other words, does powder position affects results. With that much air in the case, I'd wonder if it could be a problem.

Pretty much just fill it to the neck....

Thanks for posting this Justahunter. I have been sticking with 4831 for a long time. I have a couple of pounds of 4064 and this gets me interested in loading some rounds with it.

Good shooting too, that Ranger does real well.

Last year I lucked into a deal, on an unopened, 8 pound jug of IMR 4895 for $50.00! I went on Hodgdon's website and they showed a load for a 130 grain Honady, spire point, flat base.
My Ruger Mark II, in 270 Winchester, has always been,at best, an inch and a half gun. Good enough for woods deer hunting here in New Hampshire.
I loaded 46gr.of the IMR4895 behind the Honady and much to my surprise It would repeatably do less than 1 inch, 3 shot groups, at a hundred yards. I got to test it out on 180 pound, 8 pointer this fall. It worked great. 150 yard shot, DRT!
I guess sometimes, it works to try things outside of the box. I originally bought the IMR 4895 for use in my 308 Winchester but thought, what the heck, I'll try in the 270. Glad I did.

Bill































r

I got a model 70 fwt in .270 for Christmas in 1985, when I was a senior in HS. Old guy at the gun shop told me to use 4064. We worked up to 48.5 with a 130 NBT and it put 3 under the size of a quarter. I used it ever since and never knew any better until I started reading that h4831 was the standard powder for a ton of people. Funny seeing this old load being mentioned again, thanks for bringing it up.

Actually, the bullet leaving the barrel is a pressure sign.

Going to have to give 4064 a try again. I’ve gone through a copule pounds of it in the 30-06, etc. it was OK. Never tried it in the 270. I also recall someone saying W760 is what’s used or very similar to what’s used in the blue box federal so many of us covet. Wanting to try that as well.

[quote=Oldbilly]Last year I lucked into a deal, on an unopened, 8 pound jug of IMR 4895 for $50.00! I went on Hodgdon's website and they showed a load for a 130 grain Honady, spire point, flat base.
My Ruger Mark II, in 270 Winchester, has always been,at best, an inch and a half gun. Good enough for woods deer hunting here in New Hampshire.
I loaded 46gr.of the IMR4895 behind the Honady and much to my surprise It would repeatably do less than 1 inch, 3 shot groups, at a hundred yards. I got to test it out on 180 pound, 8 pointer this fall. It worked great. 150 yard shot, DRT!
I guess sometimes, it works to try things outside of the box. I originally bought the IMR 4895 for use in my 308 Winchester but thought, what the heck, I'll try in the 270. Glad I did.

Bill


Not surprised you got MOA results with H-4895 in your .270 but then your rifle is a .270! As much hell as the .270 and their users catch on the campfire Winchester creating the .270 from the 30-06 case was brilliant.

I've had a good run with 270, but always felt like my 30-06 was easier to shoot. What with 3 6.5's, I had all but decided I was out of the 270 business when I ran across a 1963 Winchester 70 at a price too reasonable to pass up. And go figure- this beat up, bottom of the barrel pre 64 is the best 270 I've had to date. Since I can't seem to get away from the cartridge I guess I better give this a try.

OP- If you ever retry the Sierras please post your results. Were I you, I would have given that load one more test as your groups were round and not stringing or doubling.

Well done and good shooting!

Some of the first reloads i ever did was for the wife's Uncle.

He told me he wanted 49.0 grains of IMR-4064 and any 130 grain bullet i could find back then,usually Serria.

This load might not be the fastest or max load but it still shoots in all of the 270 rifles i have tried it in.

Still to this day i don't know how fast it is going,but it gets there in style.

Man, was quite surprised when I looked and saw IMR data has max at 47.5...

Depends on when the powder was bought and what loading manual you are using.

This was back in the 70's.

His J.C.Higgins loved the load.

Tom I got almost exactly the same results as Blue Box with around 54 grains if I remember correctly.

Thanks, got a jug of that, will give it a go

Yep. Just pulled my 1970 Lyman manual, shows 49.0 max with 4064 and a 130.

Just a follow up,

My wife slipped a 130 gr. Nos PT with this load through the lungs of a cow at 140 yards the other day. Complete pass through, the elk took about 10 wobbly steps and nose planted.



This has become a favorite load of ours.

FYI,

Todd

Congratulations to both of you!

4064 doesn't throw the best but it's a great option. I find the recoil feels less.

I started loading for the 270 in 1972, through two barrels I've used H4831 about 90% of the time. I went through a bottle of RL-22 with great results, but then started seeing the reports of temp variations so went back to H4831. Way back when the gun and I were younger, I used 4064 with Sierra 110 sp and 90 hp. Worked great and those 90 hp really blew up the hedge apples I shot for practice.

@OP, COngrats to the wife. Looks like good eatin' ! ! !


As I have mentioned on other threads, I worked up a middle of the road load of Varget under 95gr NPT's about 15 years ago. Shot MOA or better in 4 or 5 different .243's in the family. Myself, kids, grand kids took a pile of KY Whitetails with this load. To this day, no idea what the actual velocity is. And don't care. It works....

Great report buddy. Congrats on the cow!

gwrench - Yes it feels and is less recoil because of less powder and velocity. Not a criticism.

Guys from several years of chronographing and 'several' 270s with 22" blls.....

49 grs 4064 and 130s (depending on lots of brass & primers) the AVERAGE velocity is +/- 2900 fps.
That was one of JOC's loads and it was in my first Sierra manual as an accurate load.
I killed several WT with that load. It is accurate and

it DOES work.


Jerry

Justahunter- how long is the barrel on your 670? Its been decades since I saw one!

I use 130 Ballistic tips and IMR 4350. Been using it for 40 plus years.

Congrats on the elk! If the load works for your rifle no need to change it. Just bought my second 270 and although I've never gotten my best groups with 4831 every rifle is different and I won't shut my eyes to 4064.

It is actually a model 70 "Ranger"... Same thing as a 670 with a different name. It is a great shooter for what it is. It has a 22" and the velocity with 49.5 of IMR 4064 is right at 3000 FPS with the 130 Nos PT..

Thank you all for chiming in.

Todd

With nearly fifty grains of long stick 4064 in a case that size I doubt there is enough air space to present any real problem.

Yep, 50 grains of IMR4064 is a pretty good fill in the .270.

Years ago I handloaded ammo for some family members and friends to make a little extra cash. Used IMR4064 some not just in the .270 but ,.243 Winchester and .30-06, and it always resulted in more than sufficient accuracy. However, eventually I switched to IMR4895 for the same cartridge/bullet combos and it shot just as well--and worked far more easily in a powder measure. Still keep some IMR4064 in my inventory of rifle powders, for the occasions when a data-check finds it should be among the best for certain combinations, but it has been a long time since I killed anything other than paper with it.

I'm thinking you would do things a bit differently. I know myself, I'd find the lands and back said bullet off the lands a certain amount, not just be satisfied with an OAL of the same thing for every bullet. As we both know, bullets from different manufactures are going to need a different OAL. This is because of the varying ogive location. I think people who are not aware of where the bullet is in relation to the lands are wasting components, or just plinking and not attaining the most information they can about the loads they are working on. Recently I loaded up some el-cheapo 130gr midway bullets for my buddies 270 winchester and went with an oldschool recipe of 60.5 grains oh H4831 and that load was bug holing groups (5 shot sub 3/4 moa, in fact). Of course, I knew where the bullet was in relation to the lands, and I knew that's where his rifle likes them. I will say this, the OP's rifle is shooting pretty dang good for a ranger...

Chasing the lands is the most over hyped practice there is in reloading. I know where the lands is. If it was a target rifle, I'd be a lot more worried about it. I don't need to chase the lands for it to be a very reliable and accurate hunting rifle for my wife. Does lands depth effect accuracy?... Absolutely. Do I need a 1/2 MOA rifle to have a nice hunting rifle. Not hardly.

Todd

Agree with both of you. Some bullets are much more sensitive and ill seek to put them a certain distance from the lands but I have a few rifles that don’t matter where the darned lands are at, I can’t get close enough for them to function through the magazine so they get loaded at mag length and I work from there.

JAH, it’s a great shooting load. Cannot begin to argue with the results you’ve been having.